And it's missing both the London Films logo, lower right, and top
text as well.
On Jun 20, 2015, at 12:05 AM, David wrote:
AND if you look very very carefully you can see it is quite obvious
the poster was printed for use in the film itself...
Jeff Potokar wrote on 20/06/2015 4:47
AND if you look very very carefully you can see it is quite obvious the
poster was printed for use in the film itself...
Jeff Potokar wrote on 20/06/2015 4:47 PM:
It being printed in England should be some clue as to what country it
was for... to some degree, anyhow.
And there are many
AND if you look very very carefully you can see it is quite obvious the
poster was printed for use in the film itself...
Jeff Potokar wrote on 20/06/2015 4:47 PM:
It being printed in England should be some clue as to what country it
was for... to some degree, anyhow.
And there are many
Seems you are good with Google and/or wikipedia.
Congrats.
:)
On Jun 19, 2015, at 11:57 PM, David wrote:
Being printed in England is a clue as to what country (the poster
was for)...how do you figure that? Here is the list of British
Colonies in 1949, let me know what country the poster
It being printed in England should be some clue as to what country it
was for... to some degree, anyhow.
And there are many artistic and textual (wording) variations with
this copy. Many. Let alone the missing London Films logo in the
lower right corner. That, to me, is also key.
Put it
I guess based on what has Paul said, it seems the the poster is most
likely to be from a print run for the foreign market rather than a print
run for the local (UK market) which is what the HA one appears to be;
this in itself would explain some of the minor variations, yet it still
holds some
Anyone can see that the poster listed on Bidll is not the same poster sold
through Heritage. Aside from the difference in the image, the Heritage poster
has a British censor stamp, so it was quite obviously used in Britain.
As a general rule, the British onesheet was used for export use only.
Apparently, British Lion Films Ltd. was formed in January 1955, after the
owners of London Films encountered some financial troubles. I believe that
'Lion International Films' as a division of London Films existed before that.
Helmut
The only slight question mark in my mind is whether Lion
That's so odd, isn't it? With all the internetsites available, we can't say
categorically when a subsidiary of an important company started.
Wim
Op 20 jun 2015, om 17:40 heeft Paul Gerrard het volgende geschreven:
Different companies! Eagle-Lion was Rank as you correctly say; but Lion
Hi David,
I would presume Lion International was part of Eagle-Lion owned by J. Arthur
Rank. Eagle Lion were founded in 1946.
This is interesting from Wikipedia, especially the last part “From 1946-1949
Eagle-Lion was under the control of Arthur Krim who in addition to releasing
films by
Agree with Helmut, think there's nothing to worry about with this.
Sent from my iPhone
On 20 Jun 2015, at 13:51, Helmut Hamm texasmu...@web.de wrote:
Anyone can see that the poster listed on Bidll is not the same poster sold
through Heritage. Aside from the difference in the image, the
Helmut,
Not sure what you intended with this follow-up message, but just to avoid
confusion:
You're right that British Lion Films Ltd was (re-)created in 1955 as a new
limited company when Korda went bust, but as you said in your previous
message British Lion as a company existed long
True, but information like this proves to be so important. And there so much
more info on lots of older stuff available. By the way wikipedia states that a
controlling share of British Lion was bought in 1946 by London Films. Then in
1955 LF went into receivership and British Lion Films Lt.d
Folks-At this time I have 137 of the best original 8 x 10's I've ever listed,
period. All started at $1.99. Many have no bids yet. There should many
bargains. Some end tomorrow. Featured items include: Leni Riefelstahl-five (5)
original candids, including two (2) with Adolf Hitler, Clint
What about the British Film Institute - worth a call to them don’t you think -
given their trade papers, info and resources.
Alan
Please Visit Our New Website:
WWW.MUSEUMOFMOMANDPOPCULTURE.COM
And Our Ebay Store:
http://stores.ebay.com/Museum-Store-Gifts
On Jun 20, 2015, at 8:52
Unfortunately the internet wasn't around in the 1940s ;)
Paul
_www.movieposterstudio.com_ (http://www.movieposterstudio.com)
In a message dated 20/06/2015 16:52:33 GMT Daylight Time,
w...@bqjansen.demon.nl writes:
That's so odd, isn't it? With all the internetsites available, we can't
Different companies! Eagle-Lion was Rank as you correctly say; but Lion
International was part of London Films/British Lion. It's just that we can't
be 100% sure when Lion International started...
Paul
_www.movieposterstudio.com_ (http://www.movieposterstudio.com)
In a message dated
Just my silly joke. Yes, you're right there's a lot of information out
there - perhaps too much sometimes - it's just the tracking down, the
collating, and filtering out the misinformation. Not always easy - especially
with
the speed of my broadband connection!
Paul
In a message dated
The unfavourable scenario (presumably no one is thinking fake), is that it
could be an International RR?
(Prior to that horrible RR which is based on it. I think based on the actual
printed poster, and no connection to original plates.)
Would they bother doing it for International RR?
I'm more in the thinking that it's a International UK 1 sheet for the first release in one of the colonies. Due to its obvious closeness and decent printing standard it's very close to the original release date.
Entirely possible Wim. It’s just another conjecture. Personally though I’d lay
more money out for the one that appeared at HA.
Simon
From: Wim Jansen
Sent: Saturday, June 20, 2015 7:04 PM
To: MoPo-L@LISTSERV.AMERICAN.EDU
Subject: Re: [MOPO] [FA] ULTRA Rare English One Sheet - The Third Man
Great info.
And sure seems to support your research, Wim, that this may be a
later RR.
Jeff
On Jun 20, 2015, at 12:07 PM, Wim Jansen wrote:
Okay this is bugging me, I have done a quick reference search based
on pics of Heritage (nice details!) and Emovie (aaargh not enough
detail)
Okay this is bugging me, I have done a quick reference search based on pics of
Heritage (nice details!) and Emovie (aaargh not enough detail) of London Films
productions from Imdb.
Here we go:
FALLEN IDOL 1948onesheetLondon Film logo,
nothing on Lion
Seems very sound, based on that information (if the wiki info is
correct, that is). And as mentioned before.. why would a second plate/
art be done for an international release OS? The art is very similar
to the HA copy, but it is NOT the same. Why go to that added creative
trouble and
I wrote to one of the people I know at the BFI a day or so ago asking if
they could help shed some light, I am waiting to hear back - as an
aside, they own a Quad for the film, not a UK1SH
I also wrote to Peter Snell, CEO of British Lion (yes, I used Google to
find him/the company) but
I disagree, I think the absence off the London Film logo is pretty crucial.
Anyway I’m gonna find my Carol Reed book, maybe that has some more details on
the release schedule, probably not though.
Looking at the re-release posters on Heritage and emovie I’m wondering how sure
are we that those
From the British Lion website. A brief history of the company, also
mentioning that BL became a distribution company in 1955, after it
fell into receivership.
http://www.britishlion.com/british-lion-history.shtml
Jeff
On Jun 20, 2015, at 11:04 AM, Wim Jansen wrote:
I disagree, I
[http://dyn1.heritagestatic.com/lf?set=path%5bcovers/recurring/subtypeid-11/type-i/3.jpg%5d,sizedata%5b200x280%5dcall=url%5bfile:cover.chain%5d]
This week Heritage features a GREAT selection of 475 VINTAGE lots of RARE MOVIE
POSTERS, LOBBY CARDS, PHOTOS, and related Memorabilia ending tomorrow,
As London Films went bust in 1955 and Lion International Films was set up as a
distribution company in January 1955 (surely wikipedia is right on this one) I
am sorry to say it’s almost sure to be a re-release. Why should London Films
take off their logo for an international issue? Or are there
So if that is NOT a 1949 original UK1SH for foreign distribution but
perhaps a 1955 first release foreign 1SH (and I am not saying one way or
another), it does lead down the dark path to the next most obvious
question: what are and what date are these sold by EMP
Question to all...
Doesn't the BIDLL one look a whole lot like this 1949 version?
http://www.emovieposter.com/agallery/archiveitem/12681291.html
David
Wim Jansen wrote on 21/06/2015 5:07 AM:
Okay this is bugging me, I have done a quick reference search based on
pics of Heritage (nice
It does.
And Bruce may be mistaken, as well.
Jeff
On Jun 20, 2015, at 3:01 PM, David wrote:
Question to all...
Doesn't the BIDLL one look a whole lot like this 1949 version?
http://www.emovieposter.com/agallery/archiveitem/12681291.html
David
Wim Jansen wrote on 21/06/2015 5:07 AM:
Bruce should be sent a copy of the known HA '49 poster, as a comparison.
I would be curious as to his take on this, as well.
Jeff
On Jun 20, 2015, at 3:01 PM, David wrote:
Question to all...
Doesn't the BIDLL one look a whole lot like this 1949 version?
And the good thing with EMP is... if there is info about a poster
that is wrong or incorrect, that is then later realized, they will
update their database and also inform the buyer(s).
On Jun 20, 2015, at 9:49 PM, Wim Jansen wrote:
That’s hitting the nail on the head. The info on
I too think it is an *original UK1SH for its first release in one of the
colonies*, the similarities to the UK1SH domestic poster are too hard to
ignore, and it leaves the R-50s posters for dead.
The hard question is WHEN was the first release in some of the colonies
that this poster was
That’s hitting the nail on the head. The info on EMP/HA is not as reliable as
it is often given credit for. EMP in particular does not use the term
„according to a collector” for nothing and rightly so. There’s just too little
info around in general.
As there’s no printer’s info at all on the
Agree - I would not be surprised to find out that those are late 50s or
perhaps even 1960s re-releases. I would imagine Lion Films would know
exactly when their films were re-released.
Oh, and have a look here...films distributed by Lion International
Films:
37 matches
Mail list logo
